NEW STRATEGIC THREATS TO TURKEY IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN TODAY: “POSEIDON” AND “LISBON 2.0” Prof. Dr. Esat Arslan * ABSTRACT

What is happening in the Middle East today is a direct manifestation of the “West's Paradigm of Aggression”, unlike anything humanity has ever witnessed before. This is an aggressive doctrine that is not limited to a single country but is a “usurper and occupier” version of the “Eastern Question”, which led to the disintegration of the Ottoman State, and is synonymous with the annihilation of the peoples living in those regions. The humanitarian tragedies in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon, along with the series of crimes against humanity committed in Syria, Iraq, and Iran, are reflections of this doctrine on the ground. In fact, viewed as a whole, the proxy wars waged in the region and the incitement of neighboring countries against each other are parts of a larger strategic aggression. The arming of terrorist organizations by intelligence services under the guise of civilian initiatives in Iraq and Syria, the pressure policies against Iran, and the efforts to transform the region into a perpetual conflict zone need to be carefully examined. While the policy of pressure against Iran continues, the assumption that “Turkey could be the next target country after Iran” is inevitably being voiced behind closed doors by certain circles.

Turkey, one of the key countries for peace in the Middle East, has always maintained a central position in this equation due to its historical, geographical, and strategic location. Therefore, it is of great importance for Turkey to carefully analyze regional developments and plan its security strategy not only for the present but also for the future. Within the scope of this article, the integrated threats against Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean will be examined and conclusions drawn within the framework of a "challenge & respond" context in terms of military and diplomatic relations. Keywords: USA, Israel, Lisbon 2.0, Poseidon, Turkey

1. BACKGROUND OF THE EXPANSIONIST WESTERN PARADIGM The great German thinker Hegel said, “In the East, one person is free; in the ancient world, a few people are free; in the Christian-German world, everyone is free.” With this almost motto-like quote, the German philosopher dismisses the East, or rather the “Alaturka System” associated with the Turkish word, and even the Republic of Turkey, as a continuation of the Ottoman State, as an arbitrary government devoid of rights and law, casting it beyond the civilized West and othering it. However, the crimes against humanity committed by the US-Israel partnership of horror and brutality in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran clearly illustrate this claim. After all this has been witnessed, there is no need for further words, but the visible face of the West's paradigm of freedom, equality, and brotherhood is also clearly demonstrated by the events following the French Revolution of 1789. After the revolution, the death machine “guillotine” was invented, and similarly, during 1792-93, those deemed royalists or Catholics were sent to the guillotine, akin to the “Terrorists' Death Penalty Law” accepted in Israel on March 31, 2026. Even the world-renowned chemist Lavoisier was sent to the guillotine while the prosecutor of the court, F. Tenville, shouted, “The Republic does not need scientists,” reflecting the modern-day manifestation of the US Department of Defense's “Operation of Epic Fury.” In short, this is the “Reading of History by the West.” In other words, it is a brazen approach that characterizes all of humanity's achievements as unique to itself while committing systematic crimes against humanity at a genocidal level, saying, “Look at what you think; that’s how it is.” Interestingly, this approach is not only exhibited at every opportunity but is almost defended on all grounds. The most typical manifestation of this is the “Terrorists' Death Penalty Law” accepted by the Israeli Knesset on March 31, 2026, with 62 votes against 48. The law targets only Palestinian prisoners, excluding “Jewish Terror.” Naturally, this barbaric and inhumane legal regulation has drawn significant reactions from the international community and human rights organizations due to its discriminatory nature.

During the French Revolution, the Ottoman State was under a complete “nomocracy” regime. Nomocracy, by definition, is derived from the Greek words “nomos = law” and “kratos = power/authority.” More accurately, “nomocracy” is not an autocracy, an unlawful administration, or arbitrary governance where “treatment is based on the individual.” The principle of the “rule of law” stated in Article 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, which is the continuation of the Ottoman State, is the true equivalent of “Nomocracy.” For example, if a law contrary to the constitution is passed by majority vote, it is democratic but not nomocratic. However, Western thinkers do not hesitate to declare the Ottoman system, and even the “rule of law” system of the Republic of Turkey, as arbitrary despotism in one fell swoop.

2. THE CENTRAL STATE POSITION OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY, ITS PLACE AND IMPORTANCE IN THE MIDDLE EAST Due to its historical, geographical, and strategic position, the Republic of Turkey has always maintained a central country status in the Middle Eastern equation, inheriting the great state status from the Ottoman State. Therefore, it is of utmost importance for the capital Ankara to carefully analyze regional developments and to plan its security strategy not only according to the current conjuncture but also for the foreseeable future in the short, medium, and long term. As stated above, Western expansionism has used the normative “Reconstructionist Approach” to fragment the ethnic unity of the Ottoman Milletler Birliği (Union of Ottoman Nations) within the framework of the “Eastern Question.” In this context, they first created secular artificial nations under the leadership of independent churches and, with covert assistance, aimed to establish “Modular Satellite States” both institutionally and materially. However, the “Ottoman Milletler Birliği” managed to unite many nations such as Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, Serbs, and Bulgarians under a single umbrella, akin to the “British Commonwealth Countries,” and was a kind of “Pax Ottomana” (Ottoman Peace) that kept nations together for 600 years, inspired by “Pax Romana.” More precisely, it was a kind of “Equal Commonwealth” that fully liberated multinational, multi-religious nations in their language, religion, and legal systems. In other words, the millet system offered non-Muslim peoples, outside of Islam, the authority to govern themselves on the basis of peace, order, and stability, while the Muslim peoples had a kind of “unity” through the ummah system, which served as a higher structure. After the Industrial Revolution that began in Europe, the rising doctrine of Imperialism turned the sharing of the world into a race among Western states. Therefore, non-Western lands began to be exploited using all means. However, the Ottoman State is neither the Aztec Empire nor the Aborigines or the Zulu Tribe. Although it weakened, the Ottoman State was a structurally and systematically large state. Under the influence of imperialism, non-Muslim communities that had lived for centuries within the Ottoman framework were deceived and incited. The nations within the Ottoman Empire were portrayed as barbaric and the captives of a despotic sultanate, and they needed to be liberated as soon as possible. This black propaganda resonated within the conditions of the time. Non-Muslim communities living within the Ottoman Empire began the process of breaking away from the Ottomans under the leadership of separatist opinion leaders educated in the West. Thus, the rebellions that began one after another in the 19th century put the Ottoman system under strain. Rebellions ignited by separatist militants supported by Western powers were attempted to be extinguished, but the structure of unity began to fragment. When the peoples incited within the Ottoman Empire established their artificial nation-states, they transformed into what is often referred to today as the “Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,” such as the “Former Ottoman Greece, Bulgaria, and Armenia.” It is believed that defining these countries in this way today is a very appropriate characterization.

3. THE OCCUPYING AND USURPING NATURE OF THE ARTIFICIAL NATION-STATE GREECE: MEGALİ IDEA Greece, established through the direct intervention of the West in the Ottoman State, which it othered within the framework of the “Eastern Question,” has always been the spoiled child of the West. The greatest influence in this has been the admiration of Ancient Greece during the Enlightenment period in Europe. Formed largely by the recruitment of Albanians descending from the mountains, they have been convinced that they are the descendants of Ancient Greece by pumping artificial national consciousness. Undoubtedly, this is a social engineering project. Although leading historians like Bavarian historian Jacop Philip Fallmerayer have proven that there are no Greeks left in the Southern Balkans due to migrations, and that those now called Greeks are of Slavic or Albanian descent, all these efforts have been seen as futile. The Greek artificial nation and the nation-state to be established have not transcended these truths. In this context, French writer Edmud About summarized the figurative phenomenon of Greece as follows: “The only thing the Greeks have earned through the sweat of their brows is their fame.” This important project has been a laboratory project of “Hellenism,” which has exaggerated the Greek element in the Western civilization equation to avoid losing the interest of the West. This artificial figurative phenomenon has adopted the “Megali Idea” (Great Idea) to present its new mission in a more understandable form to the Western public. The Megali Idea was officially articulated on January 14, 1844, during a speech by Greek Prime Minister Ioannis Kolettis in the Greek parliament. Kolettis argued that the collapse of Byzantium marked the beginning of the enlightenment process, and now, with the resurgence of Greece, its goal was to Hellenize and civilize the East. In the final part of his speech, he depicted expansionism with strong Western support as follows: “There are two great centers of Hellenism: The capital of the kingdom is Athens; Istanbul (Constantinople) is the great capital, the city of all Greeks, their dream, their hope.” The Megali Idea was so grand that it was framed with the slogan “Greece in Two Continents and Five Seas” (Adriatic, Black Sea, Mediterranean, Marmara, and Aegean Sea). The goals of the Megali Idea were first described in the program prepared during the establishment of the Filiki Eterya, as follows: 1.1. Ensuring the complete independence of the Greek nation, 1.2. Annexation of Western Thrace and Thessaloniki to Greece, 1.3. Annexation of the Aegean Islands to Greece, 1.4. Annexation of the Twelve Islands to Greece, 1.5. Annexation of Crete to Greece, 1.6. Annexation of Western Anatolia to Greece, 1.7. Establishment of the Pontic Greek Government, 1.8. Annexation of Cyprus to Greece, 1.9. Annexation of Imbros and Bozcaada to Greece, 1.10. Occupation of Istanbul and the restoration of the Eastern Roman Empire. The “Bloody Mission” of Hellenism, integrated with genocide-level murder, rape, and looting against the Muslim Turkish civilian population in the Balkans, resulted in a disastrous “Anatolian Adventure.” The plan devised by the West to dismantle the “Gordion Knot” through Greece and to expel the Turks, who posed a problem for the West, to Central Asia, unfortunately, could not be realized. As seen, all the targets of the Megali Idea are in the East and on Turkish lands. The Megali Idea has not only destroyed Anatolia and inflicted suffering on the Turkish nation but has also brought great disaster to the Greek army and people. After this, Greece has adopted the goal of insidiously following the sensitivities of the Republic of Turkey without resorting to force once again. Regrettably, it must be stated that, despite the painful experiences of history, it has attempted to realize a strategic partnership phase with Israel and France, alongside the Greek Cypriot Administration (GKRK). The hostile attitude of French President Emmanuel Macron towards Turkey and the military cooperation between Greece and GKRK are believed to be significantly influenced by the loss of influence in the Sahel region of Africa, as well as in North Africa, Libya, and particularly in the South Caucasus, especially in Karabakh. Today, as France enters an election period, the Macron era is nearing its end. One of the main discussion topics in the upcoming elections is expected to be whether the French electorate will put an end to Macron's ambiguous policies. Undoubtedly, another major discussion topic in the elections will be NATO. Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the founder of the “Unsubmissive France” (LFI) party expected to come to power, summarized his biggest promise as follows: “The role of NATO… is to put member countries under US hegemony. If I become president… France will leave NATO. Staying away from NATO… is France's historical line.” After all this, what I mean to say is that a new world is being established today, and the world is rapidly evolving towards a new order.

4. ISRAEL'S TRAP IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN On December 25, 1995, the Turkish Grand National Assembly unanimously signed a historic decision against the possibility of Greece extending its territorial waters in the Aegean to 12 miles based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982. It was declared to the whole world that Turkey would consider Greece's extension of its territorial waters beyond 6 miles as a “Casus Belli” (Cause of War). With this historic decision, it was officially declared that unilateral expansion attempts threatening Turkey's rights and interests in the Aegean Sea would receive military responses. This move is the clearest and most binding expression at the parliamentary level that Turkey will not allow policies that would turn the Aegean into a "Greek lake." Following this decision, violations by Greece against Turkish ships and military aircraft in the Aegean Sea, primarily “dogfighting,” brought Turkey and Greece to the brink of war during the Kardak Crisis. The grounding of the Turkish-flagged vessel "Figen Akat" on the Kardak Rocks in the Aegean Sea in January 1996 brought Turkey and Greece to the brink of war. The Kardak crisis has become a symbolic phenomenon of the deep disagreements between the two countries regarding territorial waters and sovereign rights in the Aegean Sea.

Another observation is that, just as the Trump administration engaged NATO with Russia, Israel has also skillfully engaged the US with Iran. In such a context, it is clear that a new game is being attempted behind closed doors in the Eastern Mediterranean. In short, Israel has sought to establish a dirty alliance against Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean by bringing together the old spoiled children of Europe, Greece and the GKRK. The significant impact of an environment where Turkey has garnered the support of oppressed nations in Africa and the South Caucasus, undermining French colonialism, has been substantial. On the other hand, Cyprus, resembling a large aircraft carrier, is at the center of this geopolitics. In the face of a kind of insidious military-political trap set against Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean, Turkey has also taken deterrent measures within the framework of its counter-response reflex and continues to do so. Turkey's geopolitical doctrine of “Blue Homeland,” encompassing its maritime jurisdiction areas totaling 462,000 square kilometers, is at the center of this expansion. With the Blue Homeland doctrine, Turkey has made one of the greatest diplomatic moves in its history by fulfilling all obligations of international law through a maritime jurisdiction agreement with Libya, officially declaring its borders in the Eastern Mediterranean to the whole world. Additionally, the bases in Libya and the TRNC are also part of the moves of the Blue Homeland doctrine. The maritime jurisdiction agreement signed with Libya on November 27, 2019, confirmed Turkey's western borders and prevented the trap that was intended to be established among Greece, the GKRK, and Egypt. This expansion is also seen as Turkey's new initiative to safeguard the rights of the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” against the “Former Ottoman Greece Republic” and the GKRK, utilizing the opportunities provided by the EU. Turkey has also merged its continental shelf with the license areas of the TRNC to the west and south of the island. This initiative aims to negotiate with coastal countries to determine the final borders, granting Turkey the right to declare a 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the Eastern Mediterranean.

As movements encircling Turkey in the Aegean Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean increase, the Republic of Turkey has accelerated its preparations with the passage of the "Turkish Maritime Jurisdiction Law" from the Grand National Assembly. In a process where Netanyahu has armed the Greek Cypriots, purchased land in Southern Cyprus, established dirty schemes, and attempted to disturb Turkey with dirty alliances, this counter-response reflex has gained even more significance.

5. THE BACKGROUND OF THE DIRTY ALLIANCE IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN: THE "POSEIDON" PLAN AGAINST TURKEY As widely used in political science, the areas that influence a state's political decisions can be briefly defined as follows: • Geopolitical (politics influenced by geography) • Ecopolitical (politics influenced by the economy) • Sociopolitical (politics influenced by society) Another concept is the “Theopolitics” that Israel has introduced into the conflict literature since 1948, seeking justification for its aggressive or hostile state. Theopolitics is the use of religious beliefs, symbols, and theological teachings to shape political decisions, national projects, and international relations. It is a power and governance strategy where religious motifs come to the forefront instead of rational or realpolitik justifications, reinforced by religious beliefs. In other words, theopolitics shapes politics under the influence of religious beliefs and rules, regardless of rational data or cost-effectiveness, outside of geopolitical, ecopolitical, and sociopolitical considerations. In fact, in the Middle East, this is the policy influenced by Israel.

On the other hand, Turkey's recognition of Israel in 1948 led to a fluctuating course in Turkey-Syria relations until the 1991 Madrid Conference. In the 1990s, Turkey and Israel became two significant actors in the Middle Eastern security line under the encirclement policy of the hegemonic power of the US towards Tehran and Baghdad, establishing even a strategic partnership between the two countries. However, by the 2000s, the interests of Turkey and Israel began to conflict in Iraq and Syria, and when Ankara's sensitivity towards Palestine came into play

Source: SeaNews Türkiye